NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD

PUBLIC LAW BOARD NO. 4370


BROTHERHOOD OF MAINTENANCE OF WAY EMPLOYES

and

BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY







    1. The Carrier violated the provisions of the

    current Agreement on certain dates between July 16, 1990

    and July 26, 1990, when it assigned Group II and III _

    Operators to perform trackman work of pulling spikes,

    plugging ties and boring anchors. In doing so deprived

    Trackman B. E. Zorn and G. A. Muniz of work rightfully

    belonging to them and compensation connected therewith.


      2. The Carrier will now be required to compensate Claimants at their respective rate of pay for each date that the Group II and III Operators performed work as outlined in the Organization's initial claim dated march 10, 1990.


                      F I N D I N G S

The Claimants are Trackmen who, at the time of the incident referred to, were in furlough status subject to recall. There is no dispute that on dates between July 19 and July 26, 1990 Group II and Group III Operators performed duties which might otherwise be assigned to Trackmen.
 0
                                                  Lj~-b -36


The Carrier uses as its principal defense Rule 22 - Composite Service, which reads in pertinent part as follows:


      . Except in reduction of force, the rate of pay of an

      employe will not be reduced when temporarily assigned by

      proper authority to a lower rated position.


Standing by itself, this rule is not sufficient to grant the Carrier's right to make temporary assignments under any circumstances. Obviously, other rules may govern such assignments, and Rule 22 governs pay when such assignments are otherwise proper.

Here, however, the Carrier contends without contradiction that the Operators were employed in related track work "for one or two hours each on the claim dates while waiting for track and time". The Carrier has demonstrated that such brief assignments related to the work at hand is frequently undertaken. Such is not sufficient to require the recall of Trackmen from furlough, although more extensive temporary assignments of the same nature might lead to a different conclusion.


                        A W A R D


      Claim denied.


            v

            HERBERT L. MARX, Jr., Neutral Referee


NEW YORK, NY
 DATED: July 27, 1992

 4 _2_